Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-06-17
FOR THE RAILROADS.
TIE COMMISSIONS DECISION on IHs
LoKG ARD Snort HAUL.
Competition May Bn,itle Carriers TO
Charge More for Longer than
for a Shorter Haul.

The Interstate Commerce Commission
rendered Wednesday night its long.expect-
cd decision upon the long and shorI-haul
clause Of the interstate commerce act.
The decision, Of which Is given below q
comprehensive abstract, is made upon the
petition Of the Louisville and Nashville and
other railroad companies, which were
among the first TO apply for relief from the
operation OF the fourth section Of the law.
The decision says that the statute does
rot require the commission IL prescribe in
every instance the exceptional case and
grant It's order for relief before the carrIef
is at liberty In its tariffs TO depart from the
general rule. The carrier must Judge for
Itself what are the substantially similar
circumstances and conditions which pre-
eluce The special rate, rebate, or drawback
which Is made unlawful by the second sec.
uob. since no tribunal is emDOwered 10
Judge for Il until after The carrier
has acted. and then only for the
purpose Of determining whether its ac-
ton constitutes violation Of law. Tnc
commission, therefore, will not undertake
10 decide in advance what constitutes or
what does not constitute discrimination
"undcr substantially similar circumstances
and conditions" but will leave railroad
companies, in fixing their tariffs, II act
upon their own judgment and AZ their risk,
subject 10 accountability before the COM
mission and the courts in eases where
eomplainti Is made by interested parties OF
violation OF the law. For the guidance,
however. Of railroad companies, the CON-
mission hsS considered nearly an the PleS
tons raised under the iourth section Of The
law, and had reached conclusions which
are summarized GS follows:
81 Al . -.
section against n greater change for short
sT than for longer distance over The same
line. in the same direction, the shorter be-
ing included within the longer distance, a>
qualified therein. is limited 20 cl>aS in
which the circumstances and conditions
are substantially similar.
Second. That the phrase, "undcr >ub
staniially similar circumstances aud c0ndi-
tons" IN the fourth section, l. used in tac
same sense a. in The second section. and
under the qualified form Of the prohibition
10 the fourth section carriers are required
70 jpdCe i'm the first Instance with regard 10
the similarity or diS,Im.iJri;y oi the cir
cumslances aud conditions that forbid or
Emit greater charge fora shorter dis
t3nce.
Jbad. That the Judgment OF carrier, ia
j. not fnal, hat is subject to the authority
Of the commission and OF the court, 10 d.
eide whether error has been committed or
whether The statute has been violated. In
case Of complaint for violating the fourth
.ocn0u Of the act the burden Of proof i
on the carrier 10 Justify any departure from
the general rule prescribed 10y the statute
by showing that the circumstances and con-
diionS are substantially diS>milar
Fourth. That the provisions Of section
I. reguiTing charges 10 be reasonable and
inst, and of section >. forhidding unjust
discrimination, apply when exceptional
charges ATE made under section a. they
30 in other cases.
Fifth. That the existence Of actuIl com
petition. which j. OF controlling force in
respect to traffic lniportan, in 2mount, may
make out the dis>imilar circumstances ard
conditions emitting the carrier to charge
less for the lon.er than for the shorter haul
over the same line in the same direction,
The shorter heinz included In the longer,
IN he following cl-cs:
!. when the competition Is with carriers
tv water who are not subject to The proyi-
Son, 81 The statute.
.. WHEN the competition i With foreign
or other railroads which are not subject to
the provisions Of the statute.
3 In rare and peculiar eases Of cOmpeti
ton between railroad, which are subject 10
the statute. when strict application of the
general rule Il the statute would be de-
siructjNe Of competition.
sixth. The commission further decides
that when greater charge in The aggregate
j. made for a shorter than for a longer dis
tauce over the same line in The same Gi-
Tcction. the shorter being included in tine
longer distance. il j. not sufficient iu,tiii-
cation therefor HAT thu traffic which l. sub
iecitd 10 such greater charge X way or loc Al
irafir ana that which i given The NOR
favorable rates is not. Nor l. II sufficient
justification for such greater charge tnat
The shoIlhaul traffic Is more expensive 20
the Garner. unless when the circumstances
ale such - 10 make IT exceptionally cY-
pen>ive or the lmg.baul traffic exception.
ally inexpensive, the difference bcinc
extraordinary and susceptible OF definite
proof: nor that the lesser charge on the
longer baul mas for IL motive the en-.
courac,urnt Of manufactures or some
other branch OF industry; nor that it i de-
signed 10 build up business or trade cen.
tres: nor that the lesser charGe Oh the
longer haul i merely continuation oi the
favorable raicS under which trade centres
or industrial establishments have beer
built up. The fact that long-nlnl traffic
Will only bear. certain rates Is 10 reason for
carving il for less thar the cost at The eX-
pense OF other traffic.
In considering the cases governed by
The fifth conclusion the commission takes
up, drst, competition with cTricr, by
water. and saws:
Ii was fairly shown before u that in
stances exist, and NAV be found along the
routes Of petitioners lines in the States Of
Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama.
Mississippi, and Louisiana, where the com.
petjtion Of waterways forces down the rail
road rates heiow what it il possible 10
make them at nOn-oompetitiye points and
still maintain the roads with success or
efficiency. The only question that fairly
arises in regard TO 1t Is whether the cOmpe-
tltion is kept within proper boundl. Low
rates ale necessity Of the situation. and
if railroads compete with water. trans.
porfation, either on the ocean or on the
nayieable rivers, they have no choice but 10
accept such rates. TO compel the roads u
observe strictly the general rule laid dlwO
hy the fourth section would neceSsita'c
their abandonment OF some clasSc, Of bu>i-
ness in which their competition With water
transportation is now of public Inpor-
tance. Railroads must either be ALLOW ed to
compete with yessel.oWncrS and make low
charges for the purpose. or they must leave
yesse-Owuers in possession Of the bnsine'>
without the check upon charges which com
Jetition would afford.
ON the question a, 10 whether this lint
tation OF competition was intended by the
statute, the commission. after reviewing
the history Of the proceedings in Congress
which resulted in tue adoption OF the fourth
section as it now STANDS, comes 10 tbs con-
clusion:
That IN the House u well a in the Senate
il was understood tbat the existence OF
competition was intended TO lee included in
the margin OF discretion provided for by
the senate measure; and that in finally re-
ieciing the "long. aud short Daul clal>e >
Of the House bill. which prescribed an ~.
flexible rule not IL be departed from IN any
case, and rctaiuing in substance the fourth
section - IL had passed the Senate, both
houses understood that they were nol
adopting a measure Of strict prohibition IL
respect TO charging more Tor the shorter
thsn for the longer di-lance, but that they
were instead leaving The door oppu for eX
cepfionS IN certain cases. and among other
in caSes where the circumstances ana con
diiiODs OF the traffic were affected by tb'
element OF competition, and where eXcep
lions might be u necessity II the cOnpeti
ton wssto cOutiunc. And water COmpeii
lion WAS bfNOud doubt c-uecially tn view